syncope-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Francesco Chicchiriccò <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] - Support dynamic entitlements in Apache Syncope
Date Wed, 25 Jan 2017 13:59:07 GMT
On 24/01/2017 20:31, Francesco Chicchiriccò wrote:
> On 24 jan 2017 18:29:22 CET, Colm O hEigeartaigh <> ha scritto:
>> Hi Francesco,
>> Thanks for your detailed reply! It's going to take me some time to wrap
>> my
>> head around all of the details. :-)
> Oh, sorry for this, but these ideas have been ringing in my head for quite some time...
> I have also others, all in the direction of further improving Syncope, and I am happy
to discuss here to clarify, better define, go beyond my direct experience, etc.
>> Let me just ask an initial question...when you define privilege management
>> as " the ability to discover, define and map the rights that users own
>> on external resources" - are you referring only to resources in the
>> Syncope terminology here - Identity stores like LDAP etc.?
>> The reason I ask is that our interest is in being able to define
>> privileges for external services (say some arbitrary REST service requires a given
>> entitlement). Is this use-case accommadated by your proposal, or are we
>> talking about separate things here?
> Interesting point, indeed.
> I admit that below I was exactly referring to Syncope's External Resources, but your
sample about REST service is significant.
> Let's suppose we introduce the new concept of Application: what kind of communication
will Syncope establish with it?
> Coming to your sample: what would be the use case of managing in Syncope the privileges
available into an external REST service? How would you fetch them? Supposing you're able to
associate them to (groups of) users, wow would you push such association to the REST service?
> That's why I initially thought to reuse ConnId connectors for this purpose.

After some further thinking on this topic, I have realized that my perspective was simply

I was assuming that Syncope will *provision* privileges to applications in the same way as
today it provisions users to resources, but I realize instead that we should reverse the perspective:

* Syncope defines applications, privileges and access policies (User U1 is allowed to access
application A1 with privilege P1)
* Syncope provides REST endpoint(s) that applications can invoke to check if their users own
certain privileges

Essentially, Syncope will provide all means to define and evaluate access policies, and I
don't see any reason to not adopt the relevant standards in this domain, e.g. XACML.

Does it sound better?

>> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 8:30 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò<>
>>> With "dynamic entitlements", I think you are referring to privilege management,
e.g. the ability to discover, define and map the rights that users own on external resources.
>>> I would not confuse this, however, with Syncope entitlements: starting with 2.0,
in fact, we now finally have a stable mechanism for which entitlements are defined as constants
in Java classes (and extensions might add their own, as shown by the Camel Provisioning Manager),
with positive effects on code organization both for Core's Spring Security configuration and
Admin Console's delegated administration.
>>> I think that privilege management is a great addition to Syncope; here are few
items coming to my mind:
>>> 1. privileges must be represented as (JPA) entities, have their own TO, REST
endpoint, Admin Console management, etc. (as all other entities)
>>> 2. privileges should be defined / discovered in external resource(s): resource
R1 defines privileges P1, P2, P3; resource R2 defines privileges P4,P5; about discovery, ConnId
does not provide (yet?) any primitive
>>> 3. privileges should be grouped somehow and finally assigned to users, but depend
on each external resource
>>> 4. privileges are not really for users (in the way Syncope defines them) but
rather for accounts, e.g. the mapped counterpart of a Syncope user onto a given external resource.
>>> I think we could take the chance to add both privilege management and multi-account
management (see SYNCOPE-957): both features require in fact a new concept to be introduced
in Syncope: accounts.
>>> Naturally, I don't see any chance to land all above in 2.0 (considerable changes
involved, even for internal storage); it will be 2.1 at least.
>>> Regards.
>>> [1]
>>> [2]
>>> [3]
>>> [4]
>>> [5]
>>> On 19/01/2017 17:53, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> I'd like to discuss the possibility of supporting dynamic entitlements in
Apache Syncope. The goals being to explore if the Apache Syncope community feels that this
is a good idea, and if so to try to break the various work items down and start creating JIRAs
>>>> Entitlements in Apache Syncope are currently statically defined and are used
for internal authorization purposes only. The problem arises when you start considering things
like integrating SCIM with Syncope, as the concepts of roles/entitlements in SCIM do not map
naturally to groups in Syncope.
>>>> So it would be great to be able to map roles/entitlements associated with
users directly to the same concepts in Syncope. I don't know whether it might be desirable
to have different types of entitlements, e.g. whether we want to maintain a separation between
"internal" entitlements used
>>>> for authorization in Syncope, and general entitlements meant for external
>>>> The task would involve some UI work to be able to create entitlements. I'm
not sure off-hand if we require REST changes, as we can get the entitlements of a User by
getting the roles of the user, and then querying the entitlements associated with the role
>>>> Is it possible to associate roles with a group and then have members of that
group inherit the entitlements?
>>>> WDYT?
>>>> Colm.
Francesco Chicchiriccò

Tirasa - Open Source Excellence

Member at The Apache Software Foundation
Syncope, Cocoon, Olingo, CXF, OpenJPA, PonyMail

View raw message